3 Federal Court Judges - Did PM Anwar follow the recomendation of the Judicial Appointments Commission(JAC)? If not, we may have a problem...?

3 Federal Court Judges appointed - the QUESTION is whether these was the recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Commission(JAC), or did Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim not follow the JAC recommendation, and decided on his own?

We do not want the Prime Minister and the government to pick and chose judges on his own. Since, Anwar Ibrahim became Prime Minister, did he appoint judges, who were not recommended by the JAC?  

Now, there are still problems with the JAC Act 

1 - Out of the 9 members of the JAC, 5 are chosen and appointed by the Prime Minister. Since the JAC's decision are now just simple majority. The PM's appointees can always out-vote the other 4 members of the JAC.

Thus, the Rulers Conference, since late 2022, after Anwar became PM, said that PM should have no role in choosing and appointing JAC members - END PM appointees. Sadly, Anwar seem to have yet to consider and do the needed amendment.

2. For a High Court Judge, as an example, the JAC makes 2 recommendations. If the PM is not happy with these recommendations - he can ask for 2 more. This means the PM can pick anyone of the 4 recommended. 

This is NOT right - the JAC should make just 1 recommendation, and the PM takes it, and advise the King to appoint. Full stop.

The other problem that remains is the Federal Constitution

- It ought have been amended when the JAC came into being, to mention the JAC. 

In my opinion, the Constitution, when it comes to appointment of Judges must be amended to replace 'Prime Minister' with the JAC. This means the JAC advises the King, and the King appoints. Simple.

When the PM is involved in Judge appointment - be it High Court, Court of Appeal, Federal Court or the 4 heads of the Judiciary - it means the Executive Arm of the government is choosing the members of the Judiciary. There are 3 arms of the government - the Executive(PM and Cabinet), the Legislature (Parliament) and the Judiciary - and it is vital that they be independent of each other, and they are meant to be a CHECK and Balance of the other branches.

When Judges are picked by PM Anwar, and PM Anwar holds the power to 'reward' by being elevated/appointed to higher courts or as the 4 heads of the Judiciary, we no longer have INDEPENDENT judges more so when the case involves Anwar Ibrahim versus another, or even Anwar's government versus someone - would judges then follow Anwar's wishes or instructions - all with the hope that Anwar may reward them - by appointing them to becoming a higher court Judge, or even 1 of the 4 heads of the Judiciary.

See some of the earlier posts

Roz Mawar Rozain must recuse herself from Yusoff Rawther - Anwar Ibrahim case for justice to be seen to be done. Will judges 'picked' by Anwar be INDEPENDENT in cases involving Anwar, family/friends or even his government?

Judges should REJECT 6 months extension after retirement age of 66 (save for very exceptional circumstances) - Protect SECURITY OF TENURE - an important safeguard to ensure Judicial Independence?

Strengthening Independence of Judiciary - CJ Tengku Maimun, Nazri Aziz, Malaysian Bar, Anwar, etc all talking about it - REMOVE PM's role in choosing Judges? Constitutional Amendment needed, not simply review of Judicial Appointments Commission Act...

Anwar chooses and appoints a Federal Court Judge as member of JAC - When will the recommendation of the Conference of Rulers be acted on?

Chief Judge of Malaya - none since February 29? Why is Anwar delaying? Appoint NOW...

No to the appointment of current Public Prosecutor as Federal Court Judge or Chief Judge of Malaysia – Protect the Independence of Public Prosecutor and the Judiciary ### Another removal of the Public Prosecutor/Attorney General?

Malaysian Bar prepares to WALK again this time for the independence of the judiciary - following Resolution at Bar EGM(27/5/2022)

500 lawyer Walk For Judicial Independence - prevented from marching to Parliament on 17/6/2022 by POLICE?

UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary - Chief Justice and imminent 'judicial crisis'?

Establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Judiciary is Imperative to Restore and Protect the Integrity of the Judiciary - Malaysian Bar

 

Three elevated to Federal Court and Court of Appeal, including judge in Indira Gandhi’s children’s conversion case

By Hafiz Yatim / theedgemalaysia.com

20 May 2025, 09:14 am

The Palace of Justice, which situates the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal, in Putrajaya. (The Edge filepix by Patrick Goh)

KUALA LUMPUR (May 20): The judge who made the landmark judgement that quashed the unilateral conversion of M Indira Gandhi’s three children in 2013, Datuk Lee Swee Seng, has been elevated from the Court of Appeal to the Federal Court.

A highly placed source told The Edge that Lee would take his oath before Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat on Tuesday afternoon, after receiving his letter of appointment on Tuesday morning from the Yang di Pertuan Agong.

Lee’s judgement on Indira Gandhi was made at the Ipoh High Court, when he was a judicial commissioner.

The Court of Appeal had reversed Lee’s High Court decision, only to see the Federal Court uphold Lee’s decision and rule that the definition of parent must include the father’s and mother’s consent to convert a child below 18, and not unilaterally by either parent.

Lee also had presided in the Federal Territory registrar appeal in the Semantan Estate (1952) Sdn Bhd and the company’s cross-appeal at the Court of Appeal, where the judgement is still pending and scheduled to be delivered next month.

With Lee filling the vacancy, he would be one of the 14 judges at the apex court.

However, there are still two vacancies following the retirement of Federal Court judges Tan Sri Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal and Datuk Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil last month.

The Federal Court is the final appeal for cases that originate from hearing at the High Court, while it also normally hears cases with regard to constitutional matters.

Datuk Lee Swee Seng

Datuk Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz

At the Court of Appeal, judge Datuk Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz, who was previously at the High Court civil division in Kuala Lumpur and now with the High Court’s special power division, is one of two judges who would rise up.

At the High Court, Hayatul Akmal had previously presided in the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) suit against fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho (better known as Jho Low), as well as Jho Low’s parents and two siblings, and Eric Tan Kim Loong, where she had made several orders against Jho Low and his family.

Datuk Dr Lim Hock Leng

Hayatul Akmal was also scheduled to preside in Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s purported addendum case but the matter has been put on hold, following the Federal Court being scheduled to hear the merits of the Attorney General’s appeal in July.

The other judge who is elevated is Datuk Dr Lim Hock Leng, who presently serves as the High Court judge in Tawau, Sabah.

The Court of Appeal would normally have 32 judges, and it serves as the final court to hear appeals for cases that originate from the magistrates and sessions courts nationwide.

All three judges are expected to receive their appointment letters before Yang di Pertuan Agong Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar on Tuesday morning.

Hayatul Akmal and Lim are later expected to take their oath before Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim, at the same event on Tuesday afternoon, alongside Lee.

Edited ByIsabelle Francis - Edge. 20/5/2025

 

JAC 101: The selection of Malaysia’s judges, explained

A general view of the Federal Court in Putrajaya August 23, 2022. Under the Federal Constitution’s Article 122B, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong — acting on the prime minister’s advice and after consulting the Conference of Rulers — appoints judges of the High Court, Court of Appeal, Federal Court and the top four judges including the chief justice. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa

!

By Ida Lim

Tuesday, 20 May 2025 7:00 AM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, May 20 — How much of a role does Malaysia’s prime minister play in the selection and appointment of the country’s judges?

And how have things changed before and after the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) was created in February 2009? And where do we go from here?

1. Before JAC and before the viral video: When only appointment process was stated

Under the Federal Constitution’s Article 122B, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong — acting on the prime minister’s advice and after consulting the Conference of Rulers — appoints judges of the High Court, Court of Appeal, Federal Court and the top four judges including the chief justice (CJ).

Before giving his advice, Article 122B requires the prime minister to consult others such as the CJ and one of the other top three judges — President of Court of Appeal, Chief Judge of the High Court in Malaya and Chief Judge of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak — depending on the position to be filled

To be qualified as a judge, the Federal Constitution’s Article 123 only says you have to be:

• a Malaysian
• had been a lawyer, a member of Malaysia’s judicial and legal services, or a member of a state’s legal service in the 10 years before appointment as judge.

The Constitution does not give other details such as how a judge would be selected and what standards they should have.

This changed after the VK Lingam tape scandal erupted on September 19, 2007, involving a video clip of a December 2001 phone conversation between a senior lawyer and a top judge on the alleged brokering of judges’ appointments and promotions.

The Malaysian Bar on September 26, 2007 proposed a JAC to restore public confidence in the judiciary, and the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on the Lingam tape scandal in its May 2008 report also recommended setting up a JAC.

2. What is the JAC?

Before this, the Federal Constitution only stated the process for appointment of judges.

The JAC now fills in the gap by stating the process for selection of potential judges. So it is now like a two-step process.

Simply put, the JAC filters and selects candidates for recommendation to the prime minister, before the prime minister gives advice to the Agong for the judges to be appointed.

Based on the JAC Act 2009, the JAC has nine members:

• the top four judges, including the CJ who chairs the JAC
• five persons appointed by the prime minister: a Federal Court judge, and four eminent persons who are not members of the executive or public service

This means the prime minister effectively controls the majority of appointments to the JAC, although the JAC Act does require the prime minister to appoint the four eminent persons after consultation with legal professional bodies and the attorney general.

The PM can revoke the four eminent persons’ appointments any time without giving a reason, and decides the allowance amount paid to JAC members.

Based on regulations made under the JAC Act, JAC can receive either applications from candidates themselves for High Court vacancies or proposed names such as from the judiciary’s current and outgoing top four judges as well as from eminent persons who have knowledge of the legal profession for Court of Appeal and Federal Court vacancies.

JAC then checks if these names are qualified to even be selected as judges.

3. What are the qualifications you have to be a judge in Malaysia?

Before this, Malaysians only knew that a potential judge had to be a Malaysian with 10 years’ of relevant legal experience (based on Article 123).

Now, with the JAC, there is a detailed list of standards that a candidate must meet:

The JAC Act’s Section 23 requires a candidate to:

1. Be qualified under Article 123

2. Meet five criteria:

• integrity, competency and experience
• objective, impartial, fair and good moral character
• decisiveness, ability to make timely judgments and good legal writing skills,
• industriousness and ability to manage cases well,
• physical and mental health.

3. Not be appointed if the candidate is a judge who has at least three unwritten judgments that have been overdue for at least 60 days

On top of that, the JAC’s website has a detailed list of 10 minimal essential qualities to be a judge, including integrity (which should be undisputed), legal knowledge and ability, professional experience, diligence, and health.

As part of those 10 points, JAC also evaluates a candidate’s judicial temperament — such as not being arrogant, impatient or arbitrary; being fair and calm — and financial responsibility, as it is important to predict if they can resist pressure that might compromise their independence.

As part of the selection process, JAC’s secretary has to send potential candidates’ names to be screened by five agencies: the police, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the Companies Commission of Malaysia, Department of Insolvency Malaysia and the Inland Revenue Board.

This is based on regulations created under the JAC Act.

4. Voting to select the candidates

At JAC’s selection meetings, there must be at least seven JAC members, and their votes on candidates must be by secret ballot and by majority decision.

5. How do JAC’s recommended names go to PM?

The JAC then submits a report to the PM on its recommended candidates and the reasons why it selected them.

JAC has to give at least three candidates’ names for each High Court judge vacancy, and at least two names for each vacancy for the more senior roles: the top four judges, Court of Appeal, Federal Court judges.

However, after receiving the report, the PM may request two additional names for the more senior roles.

After the PM accepts any names from JAC, he then gives his advice to the Agong under Article 122B. So it is still the Agong who appoints judges based on the PM’s advice.

6. What are some safeguards in the JAC Act?

JAC’s members will stop being a member for reasons such as turning bankrupt, being of unsound mind or incapable of discharging his duties, or convicted for fraud or corruption offences.

JAC members cannot attend a meeting to select candidates, if they are being considered as a candidate or if they are “related” or “connected” to a candidate.

• Related: Nine categories including if the candidate is JAC member’s sibling, uncle, aunt, cousin, spouse, ex-spouse; family member of spouse or ex-spouse
• Connected: Eight categories including if the candidate is JAC member’s nominee, partner, director in JAC member’s company

An offender may be fined up to RM100,000, jailed for up to two years, or both, if you commit any of these offences under the JAC Act:

• As a JAC member, fail to disclose your relationship to a candidate
• Anyone who influences or attempts to influence the decision of JAC or any JAC member
• Anyone who gives false or misleading information to JAC in support of any candidate for JAC’s selection

7. Why is JAC in the spotlight again?

On April 8, Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat’s 24th Commonwealth Law Conference speech noted recent proposals for legal changes “to remove the role of the prime minister in the appointment of judges”, which she said would help ensure that the process remains based “on merit and free from any perception of political influence”.

Also on April 8, lawyer Datuk Syed Amir Syakib Arsalan Syed Ibrahim filed a lawsuit to ask the High Court to declare the JAC Act as unconstitutional and invalid, and to get a court order for the prime minister to follow the Article 122B process to appoint judges without JAC’s “interference”.

The lawyer has also applied for a court order to temporarily suspend the JAC Act’s mechanism and for the PM to still be allowed to give advice to the Agong to appoint judges without being subject to JAC’s recommendations, pending the resolution of his lawsuit.

The High Court will be hearing on June 25 the lawyer’s application to temporarily allow the PM to skip following JAC’s recommendations of candidates when giving advice while also enabling the appointment of judges to go on, and will hear the lawsuit on July 16.

On April 9, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said the government would defend the JAC Act’s validity in court but also comprehensively review the JAC’s framework to ensure judicial independence.

8. What are the existing suggestions to reform judicial appointments in Malaysia?

The Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law’s 2015 report on the Commonwealth’s best practices for appointing judges noted that 81 per cent of Commonwealth countries — Malaysia among them —had a Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) responsible for selecting or shortlisting candidates, making it increasingly uncommon for such appointments to be handled solely by the government’s executive branch.

Local legal experts have also in a recent forum said the JAC has brought much-needed reforms to Malaysia’s judicial appointments process and should be retained, with improvements, while also suggesting the prime minister continue to play a limited role in the entire process.

Over the years and under the tenure of different PMs, many in civil society had pushed for reforms to the process of selecting judges in Malaysia and to enhance the JAC, including the Malaysian Bar — as early as December 2008 when it commented on the Bill for the JAC Act and even until now — and institutional reform group Bersih, through its 2021 policy research report.

The Conference of Rulers had also on November 30, 2022 proposed removing the PM’s role to appoint JAC members and to give this role to others such as a parliamentary select committee, the Malaysian Bar and its counterparts in Sabah and Sarawak.

 

Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC):

Before, after, and what's next for Malaysia's judges' selection

Use the column header buttons to sort columns by ascending or descending orderCurrently not sorted

Step 1 - Selecting candidates for judges	No details in Federal Constitution (except Article 123, 122B):	✅Details in JAC Act 2009 e.g. selection criteria / process :
Selection panel
Who selects candidates:	❓	JAC (9 members, chaired by Chief Justice)
JAC composition:	-	Top 4 judges + 5 PM-appointed members (1 Federal Court judge, 4 eminent persons)	-Conference of Rulers (2022), Malaysian Bar (2023): Remove PM's role in appointing members -Malaysian Bar (2008): Let parliamentary committee replace PM's role
PM's role over JAC members:	-	-Decides their allowances -Can remove eminent persons without reason	Malaysian Bar (2008): Let parliamentary committee do these instead
Candidates filtering + selection
Qualified to be selected as judge if:	Article 123: Malaysian + lawyer / judicial & legal service member for past 10 years	✅Article 123 still applies.
Criteria to be selected candidate:	❓Not stated	E.g. 1) Integrity, competence, experience; 2) fair, objective, impartial, good moral character; 3) decisive, good legal writing skills; 4) industrious; 5) health
Screening of candidates:	❓Not stated	If ✅Article 123 + ✅criteria —> must pass checks by MACC, police, CCM, LHDN, insolvency dept
JAC's selection meeting:	-	-Min 7 members. Selects via secret ballot (majority vote). -Can't select if related / connected to candidate
PM's role over candidates:		JAC gives selected names to PM. -PM can: Ask for more names (=Reject, no need to say why) OR Accept names + give advice to YDPA (as per Article 122B)	-Bersih: Limit PM to reject JAC's nomination only once + must give reasons -Malaysian Bar (2008, 2023): PM must give reasons when rejecting JAC's recommendation
Step 2 - Appointing of judges	Art. 122B: YDPA appoints judges, acting on PM's advice, after consulting Conference of Rulers. (PM to give YDPA advice after consulting e.g. CJ / top judges)	✅Article 122B still applies. YDPA (acting on PM's advice) still appoints judges	Bersih: Amend Federal Constitution to give constitutional status to JAC and JAC's role

Sources: Federal Constitution, Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) Act 2009, Judicial Appointments Commission (Selection Process and Method of Appointment of Judges of The Superior Courts) Regulations 2009 • Note: Proposed reforms from Bersih's 2021 "Safeguarding Judicial Independence" policy research paper, Malaysian Bar's Dec 2008 JAC Bill comments, Malaysian Bar's Feb 2023 Institutional and Law Reforms proposals

This is a non-exhaustive summary. - Malay Mail, 20/5/2025

Rafizi's final hurrah? Too many complaints, and letting incumbent leadership decision is unjust to challengers to Anwar's Team? Greater injustice when access to court DENIED to members aggrived by party decision

In recent PKR elections, there were a lot of complaints coming mainly from Rafizi and his team, but the problem lies is that the complaint is dealt by Election Committee and the Leadership Council(who are the incumbent leaders, many of whom are contesting, and may be part of the Opposing Team, some say 'Team Anwar'). Thus, can justice be done or SEEN to be done? Most likely NO. 

The problem existed in law, that DENIES member's who are not happy with the decision from taking the matter to Court  

End oppression of members of political party & Denial of the freedom of association (and member's rights) - Repeal Societies Act, including Section 18C that deny members of political parties’ access to court when they are oppressed or are victims of abuse of power of party leaders(MADPET)

Section 18C  Societies Act 1966 Decision of political party to be final and conclusive

The decision of a political party or any person authorized by it or by its constitution or rules or regulations made under the constitution on the interpretation of its constitution, rules or regulations or on any matter relating to the affairs of the party shall be final and conclusive and such decision shall not be challenged, appealed against, reviewed, quashed or called in question in any court on any ground, and no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain or determine any suit, application, question or proceedings on any ground regarding the validity of such decision.

This draconian section prevent political party members, who are aggrieved with the decisions of the party from taking it to court. It is a violation of an individual member's right to freedom of association. The provision protects the 'association' and DENY member's from taking it to court.

Worse, when it is an issue related to upcoming or elections, when the INCUMBENT are still in control of the party. 

Party elections is a RISK to incumbents, as other may be contesting for the leadership positions. 

The challengers, in this case Rafizi and Team, would most likely be prejudiced as complaints are dealt with by incumbent controlled committee or leaderships. 

Just before the last UMNO elections, we saw some potential challengers to leadership positions being 'expelled' or 'suspended' - and that was the end of their QUEST for Justice - Section 18C bars them from taking this matter to court.

Now, this Section only applies to POLITICAL PARTIES - not any other societies ... why? Is it simply because the Court declared UMNO illegal in 1987 - thus law change ousting Court's jurisdiction to hear and decide on grievances of political party members against the party? Repeal Sec. 18C - and restore FULL freedom of association rights to every member of political parties.

What is Nurul Izzah's, Rafizi's and others stance on Section 18C - restore jurisdiction of courts to hear such matters or NOT?

When a worker's rights is violated - a worker has a right to take the matter to court?

When anyone is aggrieved by the decision of the government, the Prime Minister, Minister or any government department - he/she had the right to take the matter to court..

SO, it is absurd, that members of the political party are denied that right to take the matter to Court.. 

Maybe, maybe they should take the matter to SUHAKAM and SUHAKAM may decide that Sec.18C(that oust jurisdiction of Court, and denies members taking matters to court) may be a violation of one's right to freedom of association. 

Not wrong to have 'internal processes' - i.e. if you are unhappy with the police/immigration decision, the right to appeal to the Minister, and if still unhappy, the right to bring the matter to the Courts - appeal or judicial review > but wrongly, the bad law prohibits political party members from bringing matter to the courts..

Why COURTS? Because we trust courts to independently look into the matter and ensure justice is done. Anyone unhappy with a court's decision still have the right of 2 appeals to higher courts...  

Sadly, Rafizi and other 'victims' FAILED to call for the Repeal of Section 18C (and related sections) - that is TYPICAL as many stand silently not bothered UNTIL they or their family/friends themselves are victimized by these 'draconian' laws.

Likewise, most Malaysians were little bothered about Detention Without Trial laws - and this changed with Ops Lallang in 1987 and the Arqam detention in 1994.

Interestingly, once when Anwar was free to move, at a session at the Bar Council, Anwar Ibrahim said he opposed the use of ISA and the Arqam - he claimed that he brought his opposition to the Prime Minister Mahathir then - sadly, there is no evidence to prove whether it is true or not true?

But, then Anwar Ibrahim had promised REFORMASI and the repeal of bad laws like the Sedition Act - but sadly, we have not seen this happen when he became PM. Both PKR and DAP were all out for Local Government Elections (Local Council Elections), but now, when they are in power with the ability to restore Local Council Elections...there is no talk about this. 

Previously PKR  SHINED as the one and only party that gave ONE MEMBER-ONE VOTE - but it all 'mysteriously' changed at the end of last year - when it changed to ONLY DELEGATES can vote when it comes to choosing the top leadership - So sad...so sad. Will these delegates allow the members at branches/Division decide on who should the particular delegates vote for - or the delegate vote as he/she pleases(irrespective of how the members they represent feels/want) - NO MORE IS PKR one of the most democratic party that gave every member the right to vote...

IT is very sad when MPs and politician STAYS SILENT even when they disagree or have a different view on matters the government or Prime Minister says or does - WHY or the justification > because we should be 'loyal' and not express a different view from the government or our existing party leaders - this is NONSENSE - and this why Malaysian democracy is failing...At least Nurul expressed disappointment on the re-appointment of Azam Baki as MACC Chief, what are the times when Rafizi disagreed or had a different view, and spoke out...

JUST Raise in it Parliament - this is 'nonsense' - yes, you can try to raise it in Parliament - but you can also issue public statements, comment online on social media or print and circulate you views, send OPEN letters to the Minister, government departments, etc (OPEN letter means that it is also circulated to the people) >  Even the media will not carry ALL issues raised in Parliament, and even if you raise it, there may even be no Ministers or Deputy Minister or PM to hear it...??

Rafizi- Did he talk about PKR reforms - restoring one member one vote, amending the Constitution to remove the President's 'dictatorial-like' power - In PKR. after the election, he can personally choose and appoint 2 Vice Presidents, the Party Secretrary General, State leaders, certain number of persons who will sit in the Leadership Council, etc - this is dictatorial, as it would be better if that power is given to all ELECTED members of the Leadership Council, and later to the Council to appoint any new position that becomes vacant.

Will Rafizi win? We don't know if the Delegates exercise their right to vote independently, and not as per instruction/order of some 'BIG BOSSes"?

There has been much criticism about the fact that his opponent is the daughter of Anwar? There is also questions about 'Fair Elections' as there have been much complaints.

So, maybe the 'BIG BOSSES' may send word down to vote for Rafizi - for if Rafizi wins, people will say there is fair elections, and that President Anwar did not interfere? We shall see..we shall see..

PKR Elections - not really a concern of anyone but members, but an opportunity to comment on needed reforms like getting rid of bad laws - that denies political party members access to the INDEPENDENT courts, like needed political party reforms in Malaysia - 1 member 1 vote, and erasing dictatorial powers of the President in favour of greater democracy...

As usual during election campaigns, this time party election campaign, we hear them SPEAKING UP - but after elections, back to disinterest and silence - how we hope this will change. One PKR MP that differs is Hassan Karim - sad that he said we will not contest in the next GE (in my opinion, even if he does want to contest - most likely PKR may drop him as a candidate for GE16) 

Anwar, PKR - Danger of becoming Autocratic and not Democratic? President just too much power?

Azmin unhappy about people Anwar appointed? Amend PKR constitution to make it more democratic.

Nurul Izzah is VICE PRESIDENT - not because she won the position at the last PKR elections - she was chosen and appointed by her father, President Anwar Ibrahim. Same with then PKR Secretary General Saifuddin Nasution.. [Different from the Bar Council or other parties, where it is the whole elected Council that choses and appoints) 

 Does it matter who wins - Rafizi or Nurul Izzah?

 |P Gunasegaram May 22, 2025 8:00 AM

| As the unexpected surprise contest between Rafizi Ramli and Nurul Izzah Anwar for the number two position in PKR tumbles into an anti-climax with everyone, including Rafizi, expecting the incumbent to lose, the question is what really happened.

No matter who wins, and going by delegate support, it looks like it will be Nurul Izzah, it seems unlikely that the party will be split badly.

Both candidates seem to have no acrimony towards each other, and Rafizi’s angst is clearly directed at Nurul Izzah’s father, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, not Nurul Izzah.

Both candidates have indicated that whoever wins, they are prepared to be supportive of the other and close ranks.

But the puzzle is what happened to suddenly cause such a swing against the Rafizi bloc in the earlier divisional election last month for delegates.

For possible answers one has to rewind to last year, what might have happened there and whether there was any impropriety at the very least that took place to change the character of PKR members who voted for the delegates.

Internal manoeuvring?

Unless there is enough information on how membership patterns changed, much of the analysis at this stage has to be conjecture as to how certain events could have happened to alter the balance of power within PKR.

While PKR has refuted Rafizi’s allegations of election irregularities, it is entirely possible that new members could have been pushed into many divisions to alter the balance of voting power. That would not break the rules, but may not be considered fair.

The deadline to enable new members to vote in the party polls was mid-December, barely five months ago. With membership fees of a mere RM2 a year and little background checking, it would have been easy to inflate figures by a few hundred thousand for less than a million ringgit - small change these days.

That makes a huge difference because the total number of PKR members is said to be about a million.

True, that’s difficult to prove, but looking at membership figures and establishing whether there was a sudden increase could indicate whether this happened.

The other telling indication, although it may not be evidence, is the poor showing of Rafizi supporters at the polls for delegates. That is likely the crux of Rafizi’s complaints and the reason for the ruckus he kicked up.

If indeed Anwar’s supporters had done this - some had alleged some new members were still members of other political parties - that’s not very friendly and smacks of a quick and easy return to money politics for PKR.

Saifuddin in Anwar’s eyes

It is obvious enough, although not very public, that Anwar, who was returned unopposed as president, did not have a great relationship with Rafizi and may have even considered him a threat to his position, favouring Saifuddin Nasution Ismail.

Rafizi beat Saifuddin soundly in the last PKR polls in May 2022, only to see himself sidelined in the relatively toothless position of economy minister, where he largely proposes but someone else disposes.

Ex-PKR sec-gen Saifuddin Nasution Ismail and party president Anwar Ibrahim

Saifuddin on the other hand, was made a senator and parachuted into the second most powerful position in the cabinet as home minister, where he held on to Umno's concepts of strong central control of the media and a reluctance to roll back oppressive laws.

He was also reappointed PKR secretary-general despite his loss, although he gave up the position in September last year to focus on his role as Pakatan Harapan secretary-general instead.

Anwar’s lack of endorsement of Rafizi as his replacement in PKR - for instance, not naming him as a deputy prime minister - left wide open the question of who would become PM if anything should happen to Anwar.

It began to look like Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi may be the chosen successor under those conditions.

This did not go down too well with large sections within PKR, especially given Anwar’s excessive pandering to Umno’s wants and his previous close relationship with Zahid.

Seeds of suspicion

It was thought that to prevent a possible challenge by Rafizi against Anwar for the top position at PKR, Anwar supporters within and outside PKR may have considered it prudent to change the balance of power through new members in PKR. They had some two years to do it if indeed they had.

These are permitted under the rules, but Rafizi has alleged that they go beyond this. Thus were sown the seeds of suspicion. When the results of the divisional election became public, and amidst allegations of election irregularities, the PKR top brass met.

Meanwhile, Nurul Izzah announced her intention to contest the deputy president’s post on May 9, and Saifuddin announced his withdrawal from the contest after talking to top leaders.

When nominations closed, Anwar was returned unopposed as president. Nurul Izzah and Rafizi were the unlikely contestants for the number two position with Saifuddin’s withdrawal.

Perhaps there was a partial victory for the Rafizi camp with Saifuddin out of the way. But why did Nurul Izzah offer herself for the number two position, knowing full well it would invite charges of nepotism?

Anwar and his daughter Nurul Izzah

Does it mean she supports her father completely? Not necessarily. She has already criticised his move to extend MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki’s term for a third time.

Some in PKR said that Nurul Izzah put her candidacy in to prevent an unwanted person from becoming deputy president - that’s not likely to be Rafizi, which leaves who else but Saifuddin.

If Rafizi is out, so is Saifuddin. And if Rafizi works with Nurul Izzah if she wins, all is likely to be alright. Right now, it doesn't matter who - Rafizi or Nurul - wins. The damage is done - PKR is ailing badly.

Infected with Umno disease

With such shenanigans, something is not right - it means undesirable matters, even if not illegal, are taking place to engineer people in and out of positions of power, a patently Umno disease now threatening PKR.

In no small way, Rafizi’s position in PKR is being undermined, largely because he is straight and will not play the game that others do.

His Padu database was heavily criticised, but it was aimed at cutting wastage because those who were not entitled to subsidies were getting them due to insufficient information. He was trying to get that information.

Economy Minister Rafizi Ramli

Similarly, there were criticisms against the e-invoicing system, which basically sought to reduce tax evasion, but powerful people were against it.

Not just those within PKR, but other parties did not like Rafizi too because he was honest, sometimes brutally so.

But the ultimate mistake is Anwar’s. Rafizi as finance minister and a clear number two to Anwar would have done much for PKR and the country, reflecting the will of PKR members.

Instead, the premier sidelined him in favour of his Umno friends. PKR will suffer for it and see its influence rapidly diminish.

Perhaps Rafizi should have gone for the top post instead and challenged Anwar for party president. Even if he had lost, he would have said and done something.

---

P GUNASEGARAM laments that Umno-style politics has infiltrated PKR. - Malaysiakini, 22/5/2025

>PKR polls Part 1: Hard choices for the party

Bridget Welsh

Published:  May 22, 2025 10:52 AM

COMMENT | The 2025 PKR election campaign has showcased long-standing features of Anwar Ibrahim’s party - his dominance and the power of personality.

The inevitable conflict between the two main camps in the party - those aligned to Anwar and those aligned to his deputy, Rafizi Ramli, has come to a head.

This was a matter of time. For some, this battle came sooner than expected; those aligned with Rafizi seem to be caught off guard.

Power consolidation

The result of the senior leadership competition this week will likely be the same as it has always been across the seven previous party elections: a victory for the Anwar family and the continued endorsement of his leadership.

Fundamentally, PKR has always been Anwar’s party. Across the party’s history, space for alternative factions has opened up, but when alternative leaders pose a challenge to the Anwar core, it is narrowed.

This has been evident from the 2014 Kajang Move to the purges after the 2020 defection of the Azmin Ali camp.

As prime minister, Anwar’s control has become even more so as the office has given him even greater leverage over the party’s direction.

As the incumbent deputy president Rafizi said in his campaign, Anwar’s leadership would suffer if his daughter did not win.

Thus, it is no surprise that the campaign’s last week has seen the rally-around-the-Anwar effect.

A deputy choice: Loyalty or check

Much has been written about the deputy president contest. Both Rafizi and Nurul Izzah Anwar offer long and brave personal histories of fighting for reform and have made considerable personal sacrifices along the way.

They have shaped political and policy narratives for over two decades, from calls for an independent judiciary, anti-corruption, and greater equality.

Rafizi Ramli and Nurul Izzah Anwar

When one looks at the calibre of party leadership across Malaysia, both candidates stand tall.

They are both political leaders in their own right, outside of their family ties.

Nurul Izzah, in particular, has made important contributions to the inclusion of women in politics.

ADS

The campaign has centred on personality campaign personas - the hero agitator versus the peacemaker, hiruk vs damai - rather than on their records as leaders.

This has been a disservice, especially as the deputy president position is critical for leadership succession and direction.

At the deputy president level, individual PKR delegates are deciding on leadership style and access, with concerns about the risks of not being on the winning side.

The appeals of being more inclusive, with PKR fielding Malaysia’s first woman candidate for leadership in a viable contested competition, and the ability to concretely speak to policy are also quietly having traction.

Collectively, the delegates are fundamentally deciding the configuration of power within the party.

Loyalty and power consolidation are battling calls for checks on power and differing views on diversity.

When the results are in, the contenders’ contributions should not be overshadowed by some of the low points of the campaign, which include refusing to open party congresses and inadequate recognition of the many complaints about the integrity of the divisional elections.

Rather, it should begin with a recognition that PKR’s 2025 party election has given its delegates choices and raised hard questions about the party, a process that is never easy.

Most important contests

Arguably, the deputy president contest is not the most important election in the PKR 2025 polls.

The future of the party will be determined at the vice-president and supreme council levels.

It is in these contests that the delegates will decide on the calibre and range of voices to check the ongoing power consolidation.

It will be important to evaluate whether genuine reformers are rewarded, or if new blood comes into the leadership, especially leaders grounded in the reform movement and with technocratic credentials, or those just seeking power and spoils for themselves.

Of the 251 individuals competing for the support of the 30,000-plus delegates (with over two-thirds voting online), the vice-president contest, where 12 individuals are running for four positions, and 104 candidates contesting the central leadership council for 20 positions are the ones to watch.

These contests are comprised of three groups of individuals - those closely tied to Rafizi and Anwar, as well as those who are able to bridge the two groups and represent a middle ground in the party.

The middle-grounders are the critical peacemakers that will shape the cohesion of the party moving forward.

The real tests

In these two beyond-the-deputy leadership contests, there are three things to watch:

1) Power of camps

The “cai” lists of the different camps are circulating. It will be important to see whether Rafizi can hold onto the level of support his ground maintained at the divisional level.

Those aligned to Rafizi’s camp won an estimated third, up to 40 percent of the divisions as a whole (looking not just at division heads, but other positions).

Whether camp loyalties remain intact in other leadership contests will be important to assess, as to whether middle grounders win or are swept up in divisive loyalties.

This will shape the depth of division in the party and the concentration of power.

2) Body without the head phenomenon

The divisional results will impact the central leadership positions, as this previous contest influences the ability of the winner at the division level to control a higher share of delegates in the central leadership polls.

As such, the concerns raised during the campaign about the multiple differences between the team members who won lower-level division positions but lost the top (body without the head dynamic) could be significant in the outcome.

The results will point to the scope of this factor’s impact on the outcome and be a measure of the polls themselves.

3) Reform commitment

The election will showcase the commitment of delegates to the reform principles for party governance.

A win for individuals who have serious allegations of vote buying could seriously undercut the standing of the party moving ahead.

PKR is already facing negative public assessments about an inability to bring about political reform in government, a cornerstone of the party’s identity.

If tainted individuals are elected, this will cast another shadow.

For now, however, the cast that matters most in this party election will be the votes of the delegates.

The groups that will be especially important are the youth and women delegates, who comprise nearly a third and a quarter of the overall delegates, respectively.

As with the Umno party polls when the party held the office of prime minister, the 2025 PKR polls matter for Malaysia.

They both reflect and set the path for reform and democratic governance ahead. - Malaysiakini, 22/5/2025

 

RM4.5 Trillion Loss Because of Corruption, RM277 Billion (2018-2023) - How much corruption loss since Anwar became PM? How perpetrators are dealt with are a problem?

Corruption prevails in Malaysia -  a staggering RM277 billion in economic losses due to corruption (2018-2023) - how much during PM Anwar's premiership. Problem with Anwar Ibrahim, is that he seems to 'protecting' some big personalities from being convicted. 

MALAYSIA suffered a staggering RM277 billion in economic losses due to corruption between 2018 and 2023, according to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki said the estimate, based on cumulative GDP projections, reveals an average annual loss of RM55 billion—a figure he described as deeply alarming...Citing a 2023 study by EMIR Research, Azam noted that corruption-related financial losses could be as high as RM4.5 trillion over a 26-year period from 1997 to 2022, based on data from various public reports.

BUT the real question is have the perpetrators been charged, tried, convicted and sentence by court? The other question, is from these loses, how much has been recovered?

Anwar & Corruption & punishing criminals? 

Anwar comes in and speedily former PM Najib Razak, who is responsible for the 1MDB mess, gets pardoned, and sentence reduced? 

1MDB caused Malaysia to lose about RM50 billion or more, one of the top 10 corruption scandal in the world.

Now, even if Najib did not benefit personally, it is BEST that he being the Prime Minister and FINANCE Minister takes responsibility and apologizes to the people and QUIT. A Minister must take RESPONSIBILITY of wrongs and losses of matters that are under his Ministries jurisdiction.

But, in the 1MDB case, the money also flowed to his family at least Riza...(and Anwar as Finance Minister to date still have not explained why 1MDB dropped the suit against Riza(and others0 to recover monies..Najib's 1MDB trial is still ongoing.Riza Aziz - Still no EXPALANATION from PM Anwar as to why 1MDB dropped the suit? How much 'stolen' has Riza returned to Malaysia? Or is it a 'Raya Gift" to Najib's step son - RM1.25 Billion??

The government has paid 1Malaysia Development Bhd’s (1MDB) totalling RM43.8 billion with a debt balance that has not been paid amounting to RM9.7 billion, involving a principal of RM5 billion and RM4.7 billion interest, said Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Maslan. “To date, the government has paid 1MDB’s debt totalling RM43.8 billion.

Here, he is not talking about recovering monies - but talking about settling 1MDB 'bad debts' that resulted by reason of 'hanky panky' - so, does this mean, that the loss suffered by Malaysia may be not RM50billion - but actually RM100 billion > since Malaysia is taking out our monies and paying off debts? 

Maybe, Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim can tell us accurately How Much We Loss by reason of the 1MDB Scandal - explain in simple terms so everyone can understand. 

Malaysia has also been recovering some of money loss as it is being recovered by other countries, including the US. How much money have been recovered by reason of other countries? How much money have Malaysia by itself recovered?

But, the problem is that we do not see enough perpetrators charged, tried and convicted - especially public officers, Ministers and those in administration, the politicians who sit as Directors in GLCs..Why is that? The use of disciplinary actions is a major problem - for criminals do not get publicly charged, tried, convicted and sentenced. It is not open and TRANSPARENT - we do not even know the charges(or the facts of the case), what wrong or 'crime' did they do? 

Only information, when asked in Parliament, things like 'some 311 public servants have faced disciplinary action including warnings, fines, salary suspensions and dismissals. ...' 

Facing disciplinary action does not mean, they were found guilty and penalized. What people need to know is the WRONGS and/or 'CRIMES' they committed, the findings, etc - if not, it will not EDUCATE anyone of what is a crime or wrongdoing, and serve as an effective DETERRENT. Should we even retain public officers who were perpetrators of crimes simply with a warning, fine, salary cuts or suspension? Or even a dismissal? This means, 'dirty' public officers still remain - and the Malaysian people, who are victims, continue to fork out monies for their salaries and pensions.

A total of 286 issues raised in the Auditor-General's Report (LKAN) are currently under investigation, said Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) M. Kulasegaran.He said that 138 issues are being probed by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, 116 by an internal investigation committee under the Public Service Department and 32 by the police."As of Jan 14, some 311 public servants have faced disciplinary action including warnings, fines, salary suspensions and dismissals. The courts also sentenced two officers," he said during the question-and-answer session in the Dewan Rakyat today.

If any Ministers or PUBLIC Officers, breached public trust, and cause OUR monies to be taken/stolen/disappeared - GET RID OF THEM, after according them a fair trial. 'Secret" disciplinary processes, which ends with warnings, fines, salary cuts ...simply would not do. 

The concern is also 'SELECTIVE' investigation and action. 

It was really ODD when MACC implied that they will start investigating after the 'internal inquiry' is done. Police or any law enforcement MUST immediately investigate when it becomes aware of an alleged crime - not wait for some 'internal inquiry' or disciplinary board makes its finding...

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) will immediately step in and investigate if Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) identifies any misconduct in its on-going probe into the awarding of a RM4 million project.MACC Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki said action would be taken if any wrongdoing was discovered during DBKL's internal investigation.

The corruption and leakages of the peoples' monies continue - money that could have been used to help the poor, build schools, improve healthcare -  RM277 billion in economic losses due to corruption (2018-2023) is not a small amount...

We want to know the CRIME, the perpetrator and also if found guilty, what was the sentence/punishment... Charge them in court - let the court decide on guilt - and an appropriate sentence....

PM Anwar seems to be 'too soft' on public officers - What happened to that teacher that made students be punished by standing under hot sun, which resulted one normal child becoming a person with disability?

WHY teacher perpetrator who 'tortured' kids by standing under the hot sun NOT been charged yet? Another case of 'preferential treatment" of law breakers?

Malaysia loses RM277 billion to corruption in five years

MACC chief says evolving and sophisticated graft tactics threaten transparency and national progress

Updated 23 hours ago · Published on 19 May 2025 2:57PM

Corruption carried out now based on falsified business documents, the use of proxy companies, and by masking bribes as legitimate corporate expenses - May 19, 2025

MALAYSIA suffered a staggering RM277 billion in economic losses due to corruption between 2018 and 2023, according to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki said the estimate, based on cumulative GDP projections, reveals an average annual loss of RM55 billion—a figure he described as deeply alarming.

“In today’s complex, unpredictable and ever-changing environment, corruption has also evolved to become more insidious,” said Azam at the launch of the Accounting Fraud Working Group (KFFP) in Kuala Lumpur today.

“Recent investigative trends show that corruption is no longer carried out in plain sight but disguised behind fraudulent practices such as falsified business documents, the use of proxy companies, and by masking bribes as legitimate corporate expenses—such as consultancy fees, entertainment costs, or project development expenditures.”

He added, “These financial trails are often layered through multiple transactions to obscure detection. The typology of corruption is now far more complex and sophisticated.

“What is even more concerning is that nearly all these fraudulent tactics pass through accounting and auditing systems.”

Azam warned that when existing systems lack transparency or are managed by individuals of questionable integrity, they not only fail to serve as safeguards but may also facilitate and conceal corruption.

He acknowledged the growing challenge for the MACC to uncover intricately structured financial crimes, especially when fraudulent acts are embedded within formal systems.

Citing a 2023 study by EMIR Research, Azam noted that corruption-related financial losses could be as high as RM4.5 trillion over a 26-year period from 1997 to 2022, based on data from various public reports.

“These figures are not just statistics; they are stark indicators of how corruption, alongside document forgery, financial statement manipulation and embezzlement, undermines governance, public service delivery and institutional integrity,” he said.

“The end result is widespread leakages, declining investor and public confidence, and a serious setback to national development.” - May 19, 2025, Vibes

 

RM43.8 bln 1MDB debt paid to date, with balance of RM9.7 bln – Ahmad Maslan

Press Citations 13 March 2023

KUALA LUMPUR, March 13 (Bernama) – The government has paid 1Malaysia Development Bhd’s (1MDB) totalling RM43.8 billion with a debt balance that has not been paid amounting to RM9.7 billion, involving a principal of RM5 billion and RM4.7 billion interest, said Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Maslan.

 “To date, the government has paid 1MDB’s debt totalling RM43.8 billion.

“The payment was made through shareholders advances which amounted to RM24.5 billion and trust account (RM19.3 billion),” he said when winding up the debate on the Supply Bill 2023 at the committee level for the Finance Ministry in the Dewan Rakyat, today.

He said the government had also recovered RM33.6 billion of 1MDB assets and RM8 billion from the settlement with Abu Dhabi’s investment firm, International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC).

According to Ahmad, 1MDB’s principal loan totalled RM33.6 bilion while the interest amounted to RM14.9 billion.

Meanwhile, on the Jana Wibawa project, he said it involves  67 projects under various ministries, among them, the Prime Minister’s Department, Ministry of Communications and Multimedia (now known as Ministry of  Communications and Digital), and Education Ministry estimated to be valued at RM7.13 billion.

The Dewan Rakyat later passed the Supply Bill 2023 allocation at the committee level for the Finance Ministry of RM57.3 billion through voice vote after receiving a majority voice vote.

The Supply Bill 2023, which is the first budget under Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s leadership, was later passed at the policy level on March 9 following a six-day debate from Feb 27, 2023 and winding up by each ministry. 

Budget 2023, tabled by Anwar on Feb 24, allocated a total of RM388.1 billion comprising RM289.1 billion for operating expenditure and RM99 billion for development expenditure including RM2 billion contingency savings. - Ministry of Finance Website